click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121101
20121130
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7
#% of all the foreign aid that we do, a lot of money. israel, egypt, pakistan, iraq, and afghanistan. nothing wrong with that, but we have to work with our frens to the south. we put in 1.4, and with additional money, it's $1.9 billion. for every one dollar we help with mexico, they spend $13. they spend a lot of money on security. they got to -- we got to understand what they are doing. now, what we started off, we did the easy thing, buy them hell cometters, buying this, and e worked with george bush, and filed the first legislation before bush talked about the plan because i felt that strongly about helping mexico, but nevertheless, we worked together. we did the easy thing with mexico, the helicopters and the planes. the hard part is this is we got to start training or billing the capacity, the prison systems, the prosecutors, the policemen. we're working on it at the federal level, and they trained 36,000 police. i think they need 150,000 or more than that. we have to go into judges, train the judges, the prosecutors. did you know that a prosecutor here in the united states, if
that the spring is beneficial, we see that in egypt, this is not necessarily the case. the muslim brotherhood in egypt, the sunni islam that party with different views of regional policy. the egyptian president was in tehran recently for the non-aligned movement meeting and there is a lot of worry at him going to tehran would indicate that iran was isolated as the u.s. had imagined it to be or wanted it to be. more see meeting with iran officials indicated iran is an important regional player. of course what did morrissey during undreamed due? he criticized the regime of bashar al-assad and implicitly criticized the regime for his support of syria. this was an embarrassment for the iranian leadership, to the point that they change translation on television. he criticized syria and every man television set by rain. so trying to save face basically. but we've seen that egypt is not necessarily going to follow iran's policies in the region. in fact, the egyptians have kept their distance from tehran. they have not resumed relations in this a lot of tension in some issues. in addition, turkey eme
interest for america first? if you take a look at egypt, under the original plan, we gave tremendous amounts of foreign aid to the state of egypt. egypt is threatening israel. egypt is threatening the region because of the arab spring. we have to rethink the dollars that we are sending to egypt. we have to say that these dollars are for maintaining a security and peace and if you are not participating, you do not get these dollars. that is job one. we have to continue our commitment of foreign policy to israel. israel is our strongest ally and our sister country come and we need to do everything we can fulfill our to fulfill our commitment. all of the foreign aid is spent right here in america un-american jobs. that is when the requirements. we need to gather up our allies and protect the people who serve in our state department we can secure them, they shouldn't be there. >> moderator: i'm going to go forward, but what you think should be the basic guiding principles, speaking a bit more probably? berg: if you are referring to dollars spent, or in general, our foreign policy, americ
leadership's be it in egypt or turkey, and it's probably the move to undermind the palestinian authority because he's going to the united nations asking for the status of the states, observer state, but the change of subject, at least by the israelis away from iran and syria, on to gaza, to me, is a very fascinating development. is it temporary or going to be an ongoing -- how long is that change of subject? sometimes leaders and security people know better. they feel they could have contained escalation. maybe that's what they have in mind. is it doable? does it work in this part of the region we live in? the third promise president obama made, again, never made any commitments to syria on syria except on the chemical weapons. now, we understand right now that, you know, there's concern there was a suggestion of a need of 70 # ,000 troops in order to secure the chemical facilities in syria in case there's any suspicious movement, be it by, you know, helping, you know, by the jihadists taking over or the regime using these chemical weapons. i mean, this is a big promise as well. what pre
-the-board policy of either administration. >> well, you had three years. dramatic circumstances in egypt and libya and tunisia. they are working on syria. it is pretty difficult as flip a switch and change every country within a matter of days. part of the obama philosophy, which is interesting, it is trying to find what is possible in this area that does not get america caught in traps of unnecessary wars, replication of imperialism, and quagmire. so you have these two examples of egypt and libya which are most striking. and here you have people on the streets, clearly in opposition to the dictator there. for example, tiananmen square, bush junior and a crackdown there. around the 50s, of course, lots of examples where we tell folks and we say if you want to crack down on us, that is the typical way it is going down. for president bush to go to hosni mubarak and say you can't stand aside, you're not going to keep this if you do it that way. because of that factor, one of the key factors are gotten pushed out, libya was a different story where he had a possibility of a massacre during an obama sai
for the new egypt to do that now. last week, i congratulated him on the effort that egypt has made in the efforts on further negotiations. trying to open up gaza and prevent the smuggling of weapons. if that can be achieved, they can continue their efforts on broader issues. >> no one would doubt the integrity or honesty, or the diligent ways trying to bring about peace of the middle east, but we are concerned that we are on the wrong side of the argument. we should be with honorable friends on the side of the house have referred to the nature of 6% against -- [inaudible] the secretary is saying that we should not place preconditions for the palestinians should not place preconditions, and yet that is precisely what we are doing. we are putting ourselves in the wrong side of the argument, i am afraid. >> on both sides of the house, we are on the side of the middle east peace. it is a two state solution. our view is we should use our vote in a way that maximizes the chances of negotiations. and i know that there are strong feelings as have been illustrated. he will understand that w
of them. the idea in egypt, for example, is one of those initiatives. they have the american development bank to work on migration and development issues. so what are the implications for latin america in this context? one of them is that there is the recognition and latin america that seems to be an alignment over immigration. whatever that means to latin america, there is at least an understand common interest the second issue, some central america issues see this as an opportunity for cooperation. of course the question is not corporation, but perhaps a range of other issues where we can talk in here come the third issue, which is an opportunity to bring up agenda issues in the relationship between the u.s. and mexican and central american issues here that they have to deal with labor rights, human rights of migrants but also development issues and to cooperate in immigration reform that can have an effect on the legalization of immigrants in the united states. it may have to do also with dealing with some people on tbs. for the most part, this is both in the united states have not am
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7